Is Katie Couric good enough?

Judge the new CBS anchor on her news skills, not her outfits

September 03, 2006|By Marie C. Wilson, president of The White House Project, founder of Take Our Daughters to Work Day and author of "Closing the Leadership Gap: Why Women Can and Must Help Run the World."

Katie Couric hit the media jackpot this week, although you'd never know it. So many media outlets were busy reporting on how she can transform from "the princess" of a "frothy" morning show into a serious journalist or how she shaved 3 inches from her waistline, that it was easy to miss the news that Couric landed an exclusive interview with President Bush. Newspapers and blogs across the country plastered pictures of Couric's miraculous weight-loss via Photoshop all over their front page. Her interview with the leader of the free world? A mere blurb.

In another week, Couric will hold down a job once held by male greats of single-name status: Cronkite, Brokaw, Rather, Jennings. On the "Today" show, she was charming, attractive and engaging. She put in years of work, interviewed world leaders, even bravely had a colonoscopy on the show after her husband died of colon cancer (this sentence as published has been corrected in this text). Her experience, and not to mention her ratings, made her a perfect choice for the anchor of "CBS Evening News," one of the most visible jobs in TV journalism.

FOR THE RECORD - This story contains corrected material, published Sept. 6, 2006.

But what angle is taken in the articles about her new job? Is it her drive, her intelligence? Her interviewing techniques? Her grasp of the issues? Of course not. It's whether she'll be "accepted" in this new role. Whether she has lost weight, or whether her hair is too brassy, her locks too long, her makeup too dark, her clothes too glam or her skin too tan. And, of course, there's the perkiness factor--you gotta talk about that. After all, there were a ton of news articles discussing the style and panache and wardrobe of Charles Gibson when he started his anchor job at ABC, right? He, too, was on a morning show for almost two decades, just like Couric. You don't remember those articles? For good reason. They don't exist.

Perhaps, you remember the treatment the media gave Elizabeth Dole's intellect when she ran for president of the United States in 2000. Dole had a stunning resume as a former Cabinet secretary in two administrations and president of the American Red Cross. Yet the media focused on her appearance or her marriage to failed presidential candidate Sen. Bob Dole. Or her well-known strident streak. (Hey, doesn't Sen. John McCain of Arizona have one of those? Isn't it a virtue in him?) Despite being the second most popular Republican candidate in the polls and a likely winner if matched against Al Gore in the general election, the media chipped away at her authority, helping to kill her candidacy.

And then there's New York's Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. A recent cover story in Time magazine wrote of her presidential ambition and, tongue-in-cheek, asked readers to check a box:

Love her?

Hate her?

The good news for Clinton is that 53 percent of respondents said in a Time poll that they have a favorable view of her, and even more think she's an intelligent, strong leader. Yet, most of the media buzz continues to discuss how she can't possibly win the presidency, and most of it centers on her alleged lack of empathy. After all these decades, it's still the frame we put on females--be good, act properly, show the world a traditional model of womanhood. But if we're only told to be good girls, how on Earth do we grow to be great women? If beauty and perennial niceness are the paradigm, with their strict boundaries for behavior, how can women possibly compete with men, especially in traditionally male positions? Like president. Or anchor of the nightly network news.

I'm arguing here for a fair deal for women. Let's smash the pedestal of perfection once and for all--a pedestal that men have never had to stand on. Let's stop insisting that "firsts" make no missteps in words or appearance or past transgressions. Let's put more women in these jobs so we don't have to worry about first anchor or first head of a top Fortune 500 company or first female leader of the free world. And, let's start with the images we show and what they portray: recently a newspaper pictured Couric's soon-to-be rival anchors, Gibson and Brian Williams, seriously pondering their work; in contrast, she was shown reading over a man's shoulder, like a child listening to a bedtime story. When Couric sits in the anchor chair for the first time Tuesday, her level of perceived gravitas and her choice of attire should be of least importance in viewers' minds. What matters is her authenticity. The media should give her the space to prove her mettle without judging her based on old blueprints or trite superficialities. Those eyeing Couric--and other women as they become first in their field--should put aside preconceived notions and give these pioneering women a chance to be great.